Despite Republican Secretary of State Karen Handel's claims that the state's voter ID requirement did not disenfranchise one voter out of two million on Super Tuesday, state officials report otherwise. The photo ID requirements forced 416 Georgia voters to cast provisional ballots because they lacked necessary ID, McCaffrey wrote. "Of those, 120 returned with an acceptable ID in time for their ballots to count, officials said." That, of course, left 316 voters out in the cold.
Disenfranchisement of legitimate voters was also exhibited in "Arizona where there is evidence that during the last three votes - the 2006 primary and general election and this year's presidential preference election - a total of about 3,000 people ended up not being able to vote because of the law," according to Howard Fischer of the East Valley Tribune.
And despite the Supreme Court's ruling on Indiana's law, it "does not necessarily mean a similar Arizona law is legal," Fischer wrote.
That state law is currently being challenged and is scheduled for trial on July 27. Unlike the Indiana case, the "Arizona lawsuit contains something not in the Indiana case and not considered by the nation's high court: a contention that the mandate unfairly affects minorities."
Prevalence of Voter ID Legislation
"'Now we have a very clear roadmap for other states to follow,'" said Indiana Republican secretary of state, Todd Rokita, according to the McClatchy report. "'We've been getting calls from 25 other states that have been waiting for a green light, waiting to proceed.'"
In the 2007-2008 legislative session, Project Vote monitored 59 voter ID bills in 24 states. Forty are still pending as of April 30. Since Monday, numerous states expressed support for passing voter ID laws if not this year, in years to come.
In Missouri, Republican efforts to implement a voter ID requirement may get a "second chance," despite the fact that the former ID law was thrown out for violating the state constitution in 2006, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
In the wake of the story some media outlets dredged up Thor Hearne, co-founder and general counsel for the now-defunct Republican front group, American Center for Voting Rights, to offer his input on the high court ruling: "'The opponents' arguments have had their day in court ... and been rejected...It wouldn't surprise me if people revisit Missouri's election laws.'"
Before disappearing without a trace in the heat of the 2007 U.S. Attorneys scandal, ACVR's work centered around pushing a central tenet of conservative ideology, namely that the country was awash in voter fraud and the best protections for the ballot were strict voter ID laws. However, voter impersonation, the only kind of fraud blocked by voter ID laws is vanishingly small in the United States with fewer than two dozen federal convictions since 2002 for more than 200 million votes cast.
Other states to follow Indiana's lead include Kansas, where Senate Bill 169 "appears near certain to pass" during the wrap-up session that began yesterday, according to the Wichita Eagle Tuesday. The Topeka Capital-Journal reported that voter ID is "an issue important to Kansas Republican legislators, especially among lawmakers urging a crackdown on illegal immigration." However, illegal voting by non-citizens is a non-issue as out of 214 million ballots cast for federal elections between 2002 and 2005, just 15 were by non-citizens. Further, obtaining a driver's license or state ID does not require or indicate citizenship.
Another state attempted to illustrate problems of voter fraud, by citing indictments for what appears to be election fraud covered by Mississippi local broadcast news outlet, WTOK TV. Fifteen Mississippians were allegedly paid to vote, something that is not addressed by voter identification requirements. In Mississippi, where seven voter ID bills failed this session, "first-year Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann said at least next session, there will be precedence to take to legislators."
Like Mississippi, several Wisconsin voter ID bills failed this legislative session, but state Republicans are determined to pass a voter ID law. "Because [Democratic Gov. Jim] Doyle has vetoed three photo ID measures, Republicans have focused on changing the state constitution, a process that does not require the governor's approval. But that move has stalled," according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
One state that was not in session this year, but withstood an intense fight to bar a voter ID bill from passing last year, hopes to bring it up again in 2009. Texas Republican Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst "hailed" the Supreme Court decision, while Democratic Senator Marion Gallegos of Houston called voter ID requirements "legal discrimination," according to the Associated Press.
The Supreme Court's decision is best summed by U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Milwaukee), who said the ruling justified an "unconstitutional solution in search of a problem...It is sad that the court finds it acceptable to turn back the clock and once again sanction the disenfranchisement of voters."
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
